UAL-GSO
2172/1437
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Posts
- 176
"ASA to UAL to ATA to AAI to UAL to CS"
god damn UAL-GSO, your king of interviews.
Yeah - and if you need any wings, epaulets, hats or ugly polyester pants - call me. I probably have them
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"ASA to UAL to ATA to AAI to UAL to CS"
god damn UAL-GSO, your king of interviews.
I'm 62+, have the hip, still flying and am sick of you commuter pilots.
Enjoy your furlough
They can't because of their 5 ex wives, all their toys, piss poor planning, and face it, no social life.
Ouch! :laugh:You're just sad because he has toys, and you don't, and he has been la$d at least 5 times with his ex-es and you are a virgin.
IF you were to get furloughed, and IF you were fortunate enough to get hired by a fractional, you just might find yourself flying with a 68 year old Captain who retired from 121 flying at age 60. Would that change your opinion of "old people" ?
Look EVERYONE'S career was affected by the new law. Some guys will get stuck flying crappy lines for 5 more years.
Some guys won't be able to upgrade or get off reserve for 5 years.
Some guys won't get hired for 5 years.
But, the law isn't changing. And the fact of the matter is, the change wasn't due to lobbying by the old guys. It was a response to the change in the ICAO regs.
And, guess what, it isn't changing back. So get over it, and move on. Unless you're fond of peeing in the wind...
I have no problem with 60+ guys flying any type/size equipment. Its just that a large group of these guys got to move up their whole career based mostly on the ones older than them (ww2 and korea era pilots) retiring at 60 now they don't want to play the game. especially the "silver spoon" guys hired in the late 70's early 80's at places like UAL/DAL/AA/AAA. these guys have hardly had a hiccup. especially since the mid 80's. now they have the best pay and skeds and got there because someone before them retired at 60 but they don't want to play by the same rules. thats BS. these silver spoons have been raking in 150K+ since 1985 - if they don't have enough to retire on that alone then they only have themselves to blame.
News Bulletin for you: 60 is not a normal retirement age in any profession! Doctors don't retire at 60. Lawyers don't. Accountants don't. Business executives don't. This was not a "bailout" of the "old guys." It was the elimination (long overdue) of a systemic industry form of age discrimination. It was a correction of a long, long-standing problem of arbitrary discrimination. No court would uphold restoring the status-quo ante.I'm somewhat encouraged. The Wall Street bailout is going to spotlight what has happened to us. it's obvious age 65 was a bailout. Prater said as much with his "the FO that get's it" webcast BS. Well, obviously some things have changed and bailing out the old guys is costing us more than it should. Since no one takes a benefit until the day they turn 60, that's where the cutoff ought to be. We've had B scales and half votes before. Let's get it in the CBAs. Cut their pay and get some dough headed toward the furloughs and make everyone whole up to age 60. Keep 60 as a normal retirement age!
Prater had the chance to do this right. He should be hammering for a bailout in front of the automakers. He should have been speaking out against the half effort the ATSB turned out to be. Nope. He folded like a lawn chair and then turned to the bottom half of the profession for his bailout. We're going to see executive pay get trimmed in favor of protecting the taxpayer in the Wall Street bailout. We need to see age 60+ earnings trimmed in favor of those of us picking up that tab.
You couldn't possibly be more wrong, because in the bigger picture (don't worry about it--you don't get it) nobody gives a rat's ass what Prater says or thinks. The demise of the "Age 60" forced retirement represents the elimination of one of the very few remaining institutionalized mechanisms of discrimination.News bulletin for you Sir: Wrong! Butt cold wrong. Age 65 was a bailout. Prater called it a bailout in his "the FO who get's it" speech and he also promised he would try to keep age 60 a viable retirement age. We're going to see how the Wall Street bailout pans out for those who do the bailing and then pattern it in our CBAs.
News Bulletin for you: 60 is not a normal retirement age in any profession! Doctors don't retire at 60. Lawyers don't. Accountants don't. Business executives don't. This was not a "bailout" of the "old guys." It was the elimination (long overdue) of a systemic industry form of age discrimination. It was a correction of a long, long-standing problem of arbitrary discrimination. No court would uphold restoring the status-quo ante.
SO GET OVER IT.
You couldn't possibly be more wrong, because in the bigger picture (don't worry about it--you don't get it) nobody gives a rat's ass what Prater says or thinks. The demise of the "Age 60" forced retirement represents the elimination of one of the very few remaining institutionalized mechanisms of discrimination.
Hey, they didn't phase in the 25 second play clock in the NFL. They didn't phase in the no two line pass rule in the NHL.
They didn't phase in raising the drinking age from 18 to 21.
So why should any new law be phased in? The point is, grousing about it won't change the fact that the current retirement age for Part 121 airline pilots is 65.
Get over it.